As I am home bound in Texas due to the winter snow conditions, and bored. My mind is playing evil tricks. I'm well aware that one can live happily with only one kidney as suggested. Nah.... Anybody know how much a kidney goes for by the way?

As I am home bound in Texas due to the winter snow conditions, and bored. My mind is playing evil tricks. I'm well aware that one can live happily with only one kidney as suggested. Nah.... Anybody know how much a kidney goes for by the way?

And I'm sure it will be for slightly less cost than the Tamron 150-600 lens....

Dear Mr. Haines----That will be my best dream too, But From the Cost of 200-400 mm L = $ 11,799 at B&H now, The New 300-600 mm. must be X 2 = $ 24,000 US Dollars, Ha, Ha, Ha.Yes, Just 1 or 2 of Members of CR. can buy this Light weight super Zoom Lens.Nice to talk to you, Sir.Surapon

I see the 200-400 as part of the 24-70/70-200 f/2.8 L II line of lenses.I expect the 300-600 will be part fo the 24-70 f/4 L , 70-300 f/4-5.6 L line of lenses.

Relative to the 200-400 I'd expect to sacrifice some image and build quality but in return get significant $ in my pocket and a relatively lighter lens. I'm going to set my flag at the $8000 price point. I would not be surprised if it was even lower.

I see the 200-400 as part of the 24-70/70-200 f/2.8 L II line of lenses.I expect the 300-600 will be part fo the 24-70 f/4 L , 70-300 f/4-5.6 L line of lenses.

Relative to the 200-400 I'd expect to sacrifice some image and build quality but in return get significant $ in my pocket and a relatively lighter lens. I'm going to set my flag at the $8000 price point. I would not be surprised if it was even lower.

Like I said, I know nothing and am not too bright so be kind.

Why would you say that? It will be about the same size as the existing 200-400, with a longer reach. Frankly, I'm not sure why they would produce this lens. How is it any different than buying a 200-400 and a 1.4x III? With these two items you'll have almost identical ranges of 280-560mm f/5.6 and 400-800mm f/8, with the added benefit of using it natively without the TC as a 200-400mm f/4. Granted, Canon could optimize the lens better to have slightly better IQ without double-stacked 1.4x TCs, but does that really justify this lens? The front element will be slightly larger (107mm vs. 100mm, theoretical), the rumored lens will likely be longer and weigh slightly more, so no size/weigh advantage exists. And I'd imagine with its longer reach it will be more expensive than the current offering + the cost of a 1.4x TC. Anyone have any other ideas about this rumored lens' raison d'être?

Since Canon knows how to build the 200-400mm lens now, many of the production risks go away. This means they know the cost to produce such a lens with good certainty.

Size wide, it would be only slightly larger than the 200-400, and price wise only slightly more. Since Canon knows the actual sales figures for the 200-400, they also can estimate sales for this lens. With money being tight, its a matter of putting the money they have to invest into products that return the most profit. There is also the pride in having the best telephoto out there in a focal length range, and the new Tamron certainly must have them worrying.

I see the 200-400 as part of the 24-70/70-200 f/2.8 L II line of lenses.I expect the 300-600 will be part fo the 24-70 f/4 L , 70-300 f/4-5.6 L line of lenses.

Relative to the 200-400 I'd expect to sacrifice some image and build quality but in return get significant $ in my pocket and a relatively lighter lens. I'm going to set my flag at the $8000 price point. I would not be surprised if it was even lower.

Since Canon knows how to build the 200-400mm lens now, many of the production risks go away. This means they know the cost to produce such a lens with good certainty.

Size wide, it would be only slightly larger than the 200-400, and price wise only slightly more. Since Canon knows the actual sales figures for the 200-400, they also can estimate sales for this lens. With money being tight, its a matter of putting the money they have to invest into products that return the most profit. There is also the pride in having the best telephoto out there in a focal length range, and the new Tamron certainly must have them worrying.

I hope a miracle happens and we see one for under $10K.

+ 1 for me too.Yes, Sir, dear teacher Mr. Mt Spokane."I hope a miracle happens and we see one for under $10K."----That will be our days, to support Canon MFG. again.Surapon

The >$20,000 estimates seem really high to me. My understanding is that the front element is a significant cost driver for these lenses. Dropping from f/4 to f/5.6 is a big deal. Assessing the size of the front element using the focal length/max aperture, the 400/4 = 100 mm and 600/5.6 = 107 mm. And the patent is actually for 585 mm/5.6 = 104 mm. If this holds true, then I'd expect these 300-600 to be priced similarly to the 200-400. Say ~$12,500?